Re: dh_makeshlibs -V and udebs
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 at 20:50:27 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Removing -V would be very wrong. Either leave it as-is or make sure it's kept
> up to date with the highest version from .symbols.
Right, that's what I thought. The worst that can happen from using bare
-V (with no argument) is a slightly over-strict versioned dependency,
which is a lot better than a too-weak dependency; and .symbols files
mean library users usually don't pick up the over-strict dependency anyway,
so no harm is done.
Am I right in thinking that plain dh_shlibdeps (without -V) is only
acceptable for libraries that literally never add new ABI, which are
vanishingly rare?
> On December 20, 2017 8:35:18 PM GMT+01:00, Jeremy Bicha <jbicha@debian.org>
> wrote:
>
> We have several packages that pass the dh_makeshlibs -V flag. Simon
> says he thinks it's not harmful since the symbols file takes
> precedence. I think we should go ahead and remove it then
That doesn't follow: -V not being harmful is a reason why we should *not*
remove it.
For packages with no .symbols (C++ and udebs), -V generates strict
dependencies, which sometimes stall migrations but never lead to broken
systems. If a particular package's use of -V is sufficiently annoying,
then we can decide to invest the effort in using -V${abi_version} for
that package.
smcv
Reply to: